Windows 8.1 with Bing Revealed

When rumors of a new Windows version called Windows 8.1 with Bing emerged, many Microsoft watchers speculated about what was happening. But I can report now that Windows 8.1 with Bing is nothing more than the low-cost version of Windows that Microsoft will offer to hardware makers that sell PCs for less than $250. And it comes with no restrictions for users at all.

I previously wrote about Windows 8.1 Bing in Free Windows? Maybe. In that article, I wondered aloud about the point of this release and offered up some fanciful ideas about what might be happening. As it turns out, it's much simpler than that.

According to internal documentation I've viewed, Windows 8.1 with Bing is a new Windows edition that helps PC makers add Windows to low-cost devices "while driving end user usage of Microsoft Services such as Bing and OneDrive." Windows 8.1 with Bing "is similar to other editions of Windows," the documentation notes. In fact, it's just Windows 8.1 "Core" (32-bit or 64-bit) with Update 1.

(There are multiple releases of this version of Windows aimed at different markets like China and the "N" versions Microsoft still must sell in Europe for some reason.)

With one difference: PC makers will not be able to change the default search engine using Microsoft or 3rd party deployment tools. So when a user who buys such a PC starts Internet Explorer, Bing will automatically be configured as the default Search Engine. And no other Internet Explorer defaults are changed. And, yes, the user can change the default search provider. Only the PC maker cannot.

The deal basically breaks down like this: In return for shipping PCs with Bing set as the default search provider—and thus not entering into a crapware deal with Google or some other search provider—PC makers can save money on Windows licensing.

And that's all it is. Not a free Windows version. Just the cheaper Windows licensing we had already heard about.

I would have expected this SKU to remove the option to create a local account (thus all accounts must be Microsoft accounts) in a move to encourage users to experience syncing functionality built into Windows 8.1 and it's updated apps.

Um, so this is revealed? So what public documentation has Microsoft put out that lifts any publishing ban?

I have yet to see anything direct from Microsoft on this. Certainly they haven't communicated this through the standard partner channels. It certainly isn't on the OEM Partner Center website, nor is it on the Microsoft Partner Network website. Nobody in the press has linked to anything official. More details, please.

Just FYI: $15 is also the approx. device runtime cost for a Windows Embedded SKU that is more or less feature complete to Win 8.1 Pro. Mind you, it's only licensed to run a single application, but just saying....

I completely disagree with you. Microsoft didn't change the desktop at all. All they did was change the app launcher from the start menu to a full screen start screen and added the charms bar. They did make the desktop to appear to be an app by adding a tile, but the functionality is identical to windows 7. If you consider it a relic on windows 8, then it is also a relic on windows 7.

Here are some reasons why the desktop feels like a relic and intentionally depreciated in Windows 8
1. The metro environment always hangs over the desktop, especially the charms bar, the recent apps bar on the left and the metro clock that pops up with the charms
2. The watercolor theme of Windows 8 is nice but gives a throwback feel, perhaps Windows Whistler-esque thus making it feel like a relic
3. The desktop acts like an app, for instance you can swipe from left of the screen to right going from the desktop to another app, you can swipe from the top of the screen to bottom closing the desktop
4. Photos, and music, instead of opening in Windows media player and Windows photo viewer, open in the modern apps.
5. Certain settings require you to visit the modern settings.
6. The open with dialoge is a modern like dialog box
7. By Default a Windows 8 boots to modern.

Windows 8 is just terribly designed in my opinion. The modern and the desktop has very awkward feel. At least in Windows 7 everything feels great using it because Windows 7 has a consistent user interface.

What was Microsoft supposed to do? Stay the same forever. Just like people who say they will never buy an XBox, people who say they will never upgrade to Windows 8.x because they dislike out version 1.0 was coming out of the box, sound equally as childish. None of what you said keeps anyone from using the desktop just like in previous versions. The majority of what you said can be changed. We've been able to boot to desktop for almost a year now. I'm on Update 1 now, but I think even in 8.1, the right charm bar only comes up when you actually have Metro apps open. If you never use Metro apps, I'm not quite sure why anyone would get it. Why would being able to go from the desktop back to Metro be a bad thing if you use both. I have never accidentally left the desktop in all my time using Windows 8.x. Everytime you get a new Windows or a PC customized by an OEM, there are certain applications that are set as default, and you have to set to the program you want or install the program. Sure PDF reader is the default app in Win8, but what versions did you not have to download Adobe Reader anyway? The longer Windows 8.x is around, and the more Microsoft improves the experience, the more it sounds like people complaining just for the sake of it.

Then you were never going to upgrade anyway. I'm sorry to have to say this, but too many people in the tech world these days act like there are no adults in the room. I think it's so silly when I see stuff like "I will never buy an XBox one because they were once considering the daily check-in." What are we a bunch of spoiled brats? Why do supposedly mature, intelligent consumers act like children who have to have everything their way? So, companies can't even consider doing something you might not like? Maybe they have some information you don't have or are more forward thinking.

Is there anything to prevent PC makers from pre-installing a different browser and configuring its default search engine differently? I know I've seen more than a few new PC's with Chrome pre-installed. Or does the "not be able to change the default search engine" clause apply to whatever browser is pre-installed?

I ask because I can totally see PC makers saying "fine, we won't change your search engine", then taking the money, hiding IE and loading Chrome with Google and heaven knows how much other crapware on there just like they already do.

Please note that it also clearly stated that it is the "single language" version, which I suspect is much similar to the Chinese only version that is currently sold in china, in which you will run into troubles more often then not when you install/use other language on the computer, as lots of language support is tie to specific language pack. (some software will actually refuse to even boot had required language pack not installed.)
I guess that's lesser of a issue for single language, english speaking markets, but for the rest of the world, especially the markets that the cheap windows device is assumed to target, it might be a bigger problem than MS thought.

I, personally in fact perfer a advertise enabled free/supper cheap version than a version that lock user out of some useful functionallty that hinder the experiance as a whole.

You know, one aspect I'm universally disgusted with in Windows 8 above almost all else, & that list is pretty big, is the built in ads on the apps. That's in a word just horseshit to me. Sorry to curse but come on Microsoft! This is making Windows even more vulnerable to the junk that the OEMs put on there. Now you want to give them a cheaper version to load up with more junk?

If you pay for an upgrade OS, which I did, it should be free of all the junk that OEMs stuff on it. Now this to me portends more crapware infested PCs in a race to the bottom. It may move units that are cheap & appeal to the window shopping & black friday crowds. But it'll do nothing to help the already ingrained image of Windows being a buggy OS that's infested with crapware.

Microsoft has to fix this mess that is Windows 8 soon & not devalue it even more. They can't beat Google to free & they have hardly any chance against Apple in hardware. They've really built a circular firing squad around Redmond. I'm currently running a clean install of Windows 7 SP1 on what is arguably the best laptop I've ever used & it's yet to give me a single issue with the hardware, trackpad, mouse, drivers, etc etc etc. Oh it's a MacBook Air too. That should tell you something right there. Making a cheap version of Windows for more cheap, craptastic hardware is not the answer.

I still think it should be free but I suppose they are testing to see how this will do. You cannot allow android's free pricing to move the market any longer IMO, which is why this move is late and we're really looking at making it free in order to halt and reverse android for when android stands on equal footing with windows outside of tablets, (or chrome OS for that matter), it simply doesn't stand a chance.

Long time reader and big fan - thanks for the great site. Do you have any idea how often it is that PC manufacturers enter into these deals with search providers - in other words, is it common that a PC comes with a default search engine as opposed to prompting the user to choose when booting up? Thanks!

Hi there! I won't pretend to have Paul's experience or insights, but in my 15+ years as a computer scientist (admittedly, only in the US) and probably 3-4 dozen brand new computers I've pulled out of boxes--to say nothing of the dozens more I've worked on after the fact--I have never once seen a computer that *didn't* have some hokey DellPoweredByGoogle or whatever search engine variant. I would venture that most if not all PC makers have entered into some kind of search engine deal when they are not legally obligated to do otherwise. Basically...anything to make a buck.

I wish people (other than Paul, who doesn't) would refrain from making such a big deal about "default settings." The phrase has always been a red herring, imo, because it implies that people savvy enough to use computer OSes aren't savvy enough to change whatever default settings are in place. When I hear the term "default settings" I am instantly transported back to the infamous kangaroo court of the Microsoft anti-trust trials, wherein the latitude of options a user was given meant nothing next to Windows' "default settings."

Oh well. This seems very logical in and of itself. I can't wait to see fanboys of other companies complain that this is some sort of evil practice on Microsoft's part to "force" people into their services...

Yet somehow a Chromebook isn't the same? I don't get it. Hypocrites, I guess...

Whatever case, if this helps get low-cost, but hopefully still quality machines into the hands of consumers who would otherwise probably buy a tablet, then good job Microsoft.

Any chance this will trickle down to be the OEM version people building cheap machines will purchase at MicroCenter and the like? That price is low enough to kill a lot of Windows piracy and encourage a lot of the coin miners to build their systems on Windows rather than Linux.

Few years back I had the unfortunate experience of using a sub $250 Dell Netbook as a secondary machine. This "Windows 8 with Bing " sounds great for the RT fan club but it reminds me of Windows 7 STARTER all over again.

No thanks leave that limited RunTime only environment for super under powered systems and maybe the niche market of something like a Surface TV / Ford Sync or Media Walls / Coffee Tables.

What do you think could you load & run a dual legacy (XP/Vista/7) booting 8.1 RT onto say a dated higher end spec XP era system?

with office, outlook, one drive & the store all online in the cloud couldn't this be don't in browser

Catch-22. The apps won't come until there are more users and the users won't come until there are more apps.

They can't force developers to make apps, so all they can do is try and increase sales.

I think they are on a good path, but one thing to watch out for is people comparing a 2gb android tablet to a 1gb Windows tablet. On paper low end Androids will look better, they'll need to market it properly so that consumers are aware that they are not comparable and 1gb on Windows is plenty (for low end devices).

What I Use

Like many, I was hoping to see a new Lumia flagship before the end of 2014, and while I was pleasantly surprised in some ways by both the Lumia 735 and 830, neither offers the level of performance or best-in-market camera quality I had come to expected from Microsoft/Nokia's high-end devices. So I pulled the trigger on an unlocked Windows Phone flagship that will hopefully take me through at least the first half of this year. Or until Microsoft gets off its low-end fixation and satisfies the needs of its biggest fans....More

It's been a while since the last What I Use, but there haven't been many major changes since late last year: Surface Pro 3 has become my go-to travel companion, I've added a third cellphone line for testing Windows Phone, Android and iPhone side-by-side, and have rotated through some new tablets and other devices. We've also switched from FIOS to Comcast and added to our set-top box collection....More